Wang, K; Guo, F; Zhang, C; Hao, J and Wang, Z (2025) Unlocking determinants of smart construction: An integrated model of utaut2, ttf, and perceived risk for IoT acceptance in AEC industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(8), pp. 5394-5428. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – The Internet of Things (IoT) offers substantial potential for improving efficiency and effectiveness in various applications, notably within the domain of smart construction. Despite its growing adoption within the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry, its utilization remains limited. Despite efforts made by policymakers, the shift from traditional construction practices to smart construction poses significant challenges. Consequently, this study aims to explore, compare, and prioritize the determinants that impact the acceptance of the IoT among construction practitioners. Design/methodology/approach – Based on the integrated model of Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2), Task-Technology Fit (TTF), and perceived risk. A cross-sectional survey was administered to 309 construction practitioners in China, and the collected data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the proposed hypotheses. Findings – The findings indicate that TTF, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, hedonic motivation, facilitating conditions, and perceived risk exert significant influence on construction practitioners' intention to adopt IoT. Conversely, social influence and habit exhibit no significant impact. Notably, the results unveil the moderating influence of gender on key relationships – specifically, performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, and habit – in relation to the behavioral intention to adopt IoT among construction practitioners. In general, the model explains 71% of the variance in the behavioral intention to adopt IoT, indicating that the independent constructs influenced 71% of practitioners' intentions to use IoT. Practical implications – These findings provide both theoretical support and empirical evidence, offering valuable insights for stakeholders aiming to gain a deeper understanding of the critical factors influencing practitioners' intention to adopt IoT. This knowledge equips them to formulate programs and strategies for promoting effective IoT implementation within the AEC field. Originality/value – This study contributes to the existing literature by affirming antecedents and uncovering moderators in IoT adoption. It enhances the existing theoretical frameworks by integrating UTAUT2, TTF, and perceived risk, thereby making a substantial contribution to the advancement of technology adoption research in the AEC sector.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adoption; construction 4.0; factors; information system; internet of things; ttf; utaut2 |
| Index terms: | internet, determinant, implementation, technology adoption, effectiveness, critical factor, variance, integrated model, efficiency, construction 4.0, traditional construction, information system, China, habit, methodology, program, practitioner, evidence, strategy, structural equation modelling, survey, construction practitioner, motivation |
| Subjects: | management, software systems, performance management, professional development, measurement and scaling, information systems, statistical analysis, data collection methods, risk assessment, computing systems, research methods, Geography, heritage and conservation, evaluation and assessment methods, digital engineering, practitioner, health behaviours and lifestyles, psychology, innovation and technology management, contractual arrangements, analytical methods |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here